Four days after the Chicago Board of Education confirmed Mayor Richard Daley’s choice of Ron Huberman as the next Chicago Public Schools CEO last month, it was revealed in a Sun-Times story that the new schools chief was gay and has had a live-in partner for the past four years.

The news set off a firestorm in some circles. Illinois Family Institute’s Division of School Advocacy Director Laurie Higgins blasted the school board for confirming Huberman’s appointment:

“Whereas in many professions one’s views on sexuality and one’s sexual conduct would be irrelevant, in the field of education it is highly relevant,” Higgins, a former teacher herself, wrote in the group’s weekly newsletter.

“As educators continually affirm to themselves and the public, they teach the ‘whole child.’ In fact, that is one of the serious problems in public education: public educators increasingly arrogate to themselves areas of life that are decidedly not their business.

“First, Huberman will be called upon to superintend issues related to how homosexuality is addressed in Chicago public schools,” Higgins wrote. “Second, Huberman serves as a public role model. His open, unapologetic, unrepentant appropriation and affirmation of sexual deviance as morally defensible and central to his identity vitiates any legitimacy as premier educational leader in Chicago that his admirable qualities may have otherwise conferred on him.”

Pretty strong words about the situation, no doubt, but words that express the feelings of a number of religious parents whose children attend Chicago Public Schools.

In reality, the school board had little choice but to approve his selection. With Illinois’ anti-discrimination employment laws, Huberman’s sexuality — be it heterosexual, homosexual, transgender or bisexual — cannot be a factor in hiring.

Indeed, Huberman would have been a tough choice to reject for two reasons: He was the mayor’s choice and, second, he’s been granted special legal protections because he identifies himself as sexually attracted to other men.

So, where does this leave parents who are concerned about the role models set before their children? How about those parents who do not want homosexuality to be extolled in the classroom? How about those taxpayers who have no choice but to forcibly subsidize the board’s hiring decisions with their property tax dollars?

There are few choices for dissatisfied Chicago parents. Either move to another school district, find an alternate means of education for their children, or get over their concerns, accept homosexuality as normal and admit to themselves they are abnormal for thinking anything different.

In financially difficult times, few families have excess budget dollars to take their kids out of public schools or to move to a different district. Yet every family should have options when it comes to their kids’ futures.

One way is to establish more charter schools. Charter schools are public schools working under independent agreements with their local school boards and funded with taxpayer dollars. Chicago Heights School District 170, for example, is considering a special charter school uniquely designed to meet the needs of foster and adopted children. No other charter schools exist in the southern Cook County, where student test scores indicate a growing number being educationally left behind.

As parents and taxpayers become more and more discontented with what their local public schools are offering, the more outcry there is for charter schools. However, public school officials resist allowing competition in their districts, and rebut it by saying charter schools drain their already-strained budgets.

Not so, a 2007 study by the nonpartisan, Chicago-based Civics Federation found. Three active Chicago charter schools relieved their host districts of 1.3 percent to 3 percent of their student population while taking only 0.9 percent to 2.4 percent of their host districts’ operating budgets.

How can that be? Alternative public schools are often allowed to renegotiate state requirements and union agreements, thus, at least in the beginning, charter schools are freed from normal labor demands, making their operating costs much less expensive.

Charter school popularity is increasing, and already this year state Sen. Dan Cronin (R-Elmhurst) introduced legislation removing the limit on the number of charter schools allowed in Illinois.
fA member of the Senate Education Committee, Cronin also led introducing education tax credits for families paying private or religious school tuition. This year, he wants to double the state education tax credit from $500 to $1,000 per year.

School choice advocates say the debate about education alternatives is long overdue, and they’re absolutely right. Parents should be assured their children are being readied for bright futures with a love for learning and a grasp of basic survival skills. Taxpayers should be confident their property tax dollars are being well spent educating their community’s children.

The debate over schools, children and funding has been focused too long on how many education dollars are available and whether or not they are evenly distributed. Perhaps this moral controversy over CPS leadership will finally turn the discussion to what matters most.

It’s by far more important how and upon what our education dollars are spent. And that includes the salaries of controversial administrators.

                                                                                
Fran Eaton is a south suburban resident, a conservative activist in state and national politics and an online journalist. She can be reached HERE.